Re: relative.pm vs import.pm

2007-10-11 Thread Johan Vromans
Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: unless I read it wrong, it doesn't provide the feature relative.pm was written for in the first place, that is loading modules using names relative to the current one. If I understand correctly, that would be use import __PACKAGE__; --

Re: relative.pm vs import.pm

2007-10-11 Thread A. Pagaltzis
* Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-10-11 12:10]: But this will load *all* the modules below the current one, which is not the same thing as loading a set of selected modules. Imagine doing this with Plagger ;) Imagine trying to load all of Plagger’s modules by hand. ;--)

Re: relative.pm vs import.pm

2007-10-11 Thread Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni
A. Pagaltzis wrote: * Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-10-11 12:10]: But this will load *all* the modules below the current one, which is not the same thing as loading a set of selected modules. Imagine doing this with Plagger ;) Imagine trying to load all of Plagger's